They find a stone spear head and now they want to change history....good God! How many other lunatics out there are there?

CBC under fire for documentary that says first humans to colonize New World sailed from EuropeCritics say it is 'extremely irresponsible' of The Nature of Things to promote the Solutrean Hypothesis, a favourite piece of propaganda among white supremacists

In fact, the idea has been promoted for 20 years by two American researchers, Bruce Bradley and Dennis Stanford. It has been undermined by recent advances in genetic analysis of ancient human remains in the Americas. With little more than the comparison of stone spearheads to support it (the best known example was dredged off the ocean floor along with a mastodon skull near Chesapeake Bay on America’s east coast), the theory is widely rejected by mainstream paleoanthropologists. Most agree that a range of evidence points to a migration from Asia across a land bridge during the last Ice Age, perhaps 14,000 years ago.

There is, for example, no evidence of Solutrean seafaring, and no evidence of their cave art in North America, which would be unusual for a people known for the elaborately painted Cave of Altamira in Spain. There have also been no discoveries in North America of Solutrean human remains. It is just as possible that the American flint blades that look Solutrean were made by ancient Native Americans, and the similarity is just coincidence, or that the blades are not as old as they appear.

averagejoe wrote:Sigh...people will fall for another wacky theory! Sigh.

Think about it 2,000 miles of frozen ocean? You going to take your family across a frozen ocean?Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out....

It's just 2 guys trying to make some money and write some books on a theory.

It said right at the beginning of the video that 99.5% don't believe themDon't be the .5%!

Fall for? My goodness. Really?

Again, where did anyone suggest any families came? Or if they did, that they came intentionally?

Seems to me you've quite made up your mind about all of this, which is fine, that's your prerogative, but IMO you should be able to state whatever conclusions you've come to without resorting to false false claims about what's actually in the documentary.

As to believing or not believing, why the presumption anyone must do either?

It's quite easy for some of us to contemplate and discuss an interesting theory, without being convinced.

averagejoe wrote:They find a stone spear head and now they want to change history....good God! How many other lunatics out there are there?

CBC under fire for documentary that says first humans to colonize New World sailed from EuropeCritics say it is 'extremely irresponsible' of The Nature of Things to promote the Solutrean Hypothesis, a favourite piece of propaganda among white supremacists

In fact, the idea has been promoted for 20 years by two American researchers, Bruce Bradley and Dennis Stanford. It has been undermined by recent advances in genetic analysis of ancient human remains in the Americas. With little more than the comparison of stone spearheads to support it (the best known example was dredged off the ocean floor along with a mastodon skull near Chesapeake Bay on America’s east coast), the theory is widely rejected by mainstream paleoanthropologists. Most agree that a range of evidence points to a migration from Asia across a land bridge during the last Ice Age, perhaps 14,000 years ago.

There is, for example, no evidence of Solutrean seafaring, and no evidence of their cave art in North America, which would be unusual for a people known for the elaborately painted Cave of Altamira in Spain. There have also been no discoveries in North America of Solutrean human remains. It is just as possible that the American flint blades that look Solutrean were made by ancient Native Americans, and the similarity is just coincidence, or that the blades are not as old as they appear.

I think it's entirely possible the Solutrean theory is quite wrong, that the researchers are caught up in their own confirmation biases, that genetics and carbon dating will not support their hypothesis, but my goodness this white supremacist stuff is truly... Seriously, do we pursue any theory that could be or has been co-opted by white supremacists or other radicals?